Evaluating witness testimony: Juror knowledge, false memory, and the utility of evidence-based directions

9Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Eyewitness evidence is often important in criminal cases, but false or misleading eyewitness evidence is known to be a leading cause of wrongful convictions. One explanation for mistakes that jurors are making when evaluating eyewitness evidence is their lack of accurate knowledge relating to false memory. This article examines lay beliefs relating to memory and ways in which they diverge from expert consensus. It identifies ways in which current directions provided to jurors in this area are likely to be deficient in influencing juror knowledge and in helping them apply that knowledge in a case context, and develops criteria that can be used to assess the likely effectiveness of directions. A new evidence-based training direction is designed based on these criteria, and tested in a mock jury study (N = 411). Results suggest that the proposed direction is more effective than a basic direction in influencing juror knowledge and facilitating the application of that knowledge to case facts.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Helm, R. K. (2021). Evaluating witness testimony: Juror knowledge, false memory, and the utility of evidence-based directions. International Journal of Evidence and Proof, 25(4), 264–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211031018

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free